I accept the correction. Anki decks are useful, but for technical material the exercises are probably even better.
But I’m afraid if you want to correct the new guy that everyone ‘admires’, that line goes around the block. See: the most-upvoted comments on almost all my posts.
I accept the correction. Anki decks are useful, but for technical material the exercises are probably even better.
People with responsibilities may not be able to afford to learn technical material by doing proofs and calculations. When I spend a lot of my energy on proofs or calculations (or complicated computer programs), my ability to stay on top of the rest of my life goes down quite a bit—and when I stop with the proofs or calculations or technical problem-solving, it seems to take months for my ability to handle the non-technical aspects of life to get back up to where it would have been all along if I hadn’t gone into “technical problem-solving mode”. (The reverse is also true: if I haven’t been in technical problem-solving mode for a while, it takes a few months of adjustment to reach the level of skill I would have been if I did it all the time.)
One of the things I really appreciate about Eliezer’s sequences is how much technical knowledge they were able to teach me without my having to disrupt my life by putting myself in “proofs, calculations and computer programs” mode.
If I had not spent a lot of my youth in “proofs and calculations” mode, however, I might not have acquired the technical competence to have be able to identify Eliezer’s writings as particularly worth reading relative to all the other technical exposition out there.
Every now and then someone comes on here and makes a big deal of the fact that Eliezer does not have any academic credentials, and it makes me feel sad for them because the reason they focus on credentials and other forms of social proof is probably that they have no better way to judge the quality of his writings. That must be a huge handicap!
So, to bring this back to Anki decks (why not?) the big limitation of Anki decks is that you have to have some way of judging the quality of the text that goes into the making of the decks. Proofs, calculations and computer programs do not have that limitation. (Although it is possible for people to delude themselves into believing that they’ve produced a valid proof or calculation when they have not, the level of rationality required to avoid such delusions is vastly lower than the level required to avoid learning false information from books.)
You aren’t the only one; there are many people already waiting (or attempting) to do that.
Imagine a movie theater or other venue with a very, very long line to get in, such that the line extends all the way to, and around, the nearest street-corner.
I accept the correction. Anki decks are useful, but for technical material the exercises are probably even better.
But I’m afraid if you want to correct the new guy that everyone ‘admires’, that line goes around the block. See: the most-upvoted comments on almost all my posts.
People with responsibilities may not be able to afford to learn technical material by doing proofs and calculations. When I spend a lot of my energy on proofs or calculations (or complicated computer programs), my ability to stay on top of the rest of my life goes down quite a bit—and when I stop with the proofs or calculations or technical problem-solving, it seems to take months for my ability to handle the non-technical aspects of life to get back up to where it would have been all along if I hadn’t gone into “technical problem-solving mode”. (The reverse is also true: if I haven’t been in technical problem-solving mode for a while, it takes a few months of adjustment to reach the level of skill I would have been if I did it all the time.)
One of the things I really appreciate about Eliezer’s sequences is how much technical knowledge they were able to teach me without my having to disrupt my life by putting myself in “proofs, calculations and computer programs” mode.
If I had not spent a lot of my youth in “proofs and calculations” mode, however, I might not have acquired the technical competence to have be able to identify Eliezer’s writings as particularly worth reading relative to all the other technical exposition out there.
Every now and then someone comes on here and makes a big deal of the fact that Eliezer does not have any academic credentials, and it makes me feel sad for them because the reason they focus on credentials and other forms of social proof is probably that they have no better way to judge the quality of his writings. That must be a huge handicap!
So, to bring this back to Anki decks (why not?) the big limitation of Anki decks is that you have to have some way of judging the quality of the text that goes into the making of the decks. Proofs, calculations and computer programs do not have that limitation. (Although it is possible for people to delude themselves into believing that they’ve produced a valid proof or calculation when they have not, the level of rationality required to avoid such delusions is vastly lower than the level required to avoid learning false information from books.)
Can someone explain this figure of speech for me?
You aren’t the only one; there are many people already waiting (or attempting) to do that.
Imagine a movie theater or other venue with a very, very long line to get in, such that the line extends all the way to, and around, the nearest street-corner.